Qantas flight from Auckland to Sydney makes mayday call

[bayleyb]

Great to hear it landed safely

 

[QF WP]

Finally, some accurate reporting and it has the ATC audio of the pilot (downgrading) the situation to PAN PAN

Qantas passengers commend crew after rare engine issue led to mayday call

An airline spokesperson said the twin-jet Boeing 737-838 that left Auckland experienced an issue with one of its two engines about an hour from Sydney and issued the alert in line with standard procedures.

www.smh.com.au

 

[jb747]

Would love to be listening to the discrete frequency now between aircrew and ARFF.

You might be surprised by how little is said.

It’s possible initially it was, but if so, it was then downgraded to a PAN.

Mayday to get an immediate altitude clearance, and then PAN once you’ve got what you need. An alternative anyway.

For one, a PAN PAN and a MAYDAY have no direct corelation with the airport response. That being said, PAN PAN usually results in a local standby, a MAYDAY results in a full emergency (level 1-3). It's not out of the question for the airport to declare a full emergency for a PAN PAN if they think it's warranted.

ARFF will usually deploy on a local standby as well.

I once had a tyre deflate in flight. That meant there was a fair chance that it would destroy itself during landing. There was no danger to the aircraft, but as there would likely be debris on the runway, an inspection before anyone else used it would be prudent. And, for the same reason, a vehicle to follow the aircraft along the taxiway (not fire vehicle, just a ‘Follow Me’ car) also seemed like a good idea. I knew this would be needed hours out, so it seemed sensible to get in contact with the airport and let them know we’d be asking for the long runway (less braking required), runway inspection, and follow me. We did not want any emergency services. So, hunted through the sat phone numbers, found their ATC’s number and gave them a call. We got everything we wanted, but also a sea of flashing lights. I guess they were bored.

I can't answer that specific question - I haven't looked at the flight radar info or anything.. just going off the general media reports.. but my response is that if they did.. that's fine.

All these aircraft are certified to a certain ETOPS rating very specifically to be able to fly on one engine for the certified period. There was a lot of fuss about this initially with the 777's and transpac ops (would they get 180 min or 240min or whatever) but there are clear procedures and training to fly a twin - be it a 737, E190, 787 or 350 - on one engine for the required period of time.

ETOPs has nothing to do with choosing a runway in the event of an engine failure. Whilst people do talk about it with regard to the times, it’s most relevant with systems failures. For instance, ending up on a single hydraulic system or generator. ETOPs didn’t apply to the 747/A380, not because. they had four engines, but because they had triple or quadruplex major systems. Some versions of the A340 still had ETOPs because it was really an A330 with an extra pair of engines, but not extra systems.

Note bird strike will likely cause a landing, but essenially will shut down an engine and they are common enough.

You won’t do anything unless there is a change in the engine parameters. In most cases, an engine will digest the bird without even a burp.

If the engine is in fact shut down, we still pull both reversers on landing. They’re hydraulically operated. The sleeve will still open and you’ll get idle reverse as opposed to full reverse on the other engine.

Why would there still be hydraulic power on the engine if it’s shut down? At idle it makes sense, but shut down?

Driftdowns are not a fast manoeuvre. On the flight management computer we have the maximum altitude for a single engine at any given point during the flight. FL200 or 20,000ft is a very comfortable altitude with adequate performance on the other engine to maintain cruise flight.

What would be the single engine altitude? I’d have figured mid to high 20s. Is there a pack limit that might impose FL200. I assume the APU can be started in the entire flight regime.

 

[bladeau1981]

Hope they didn't interview this crew. Some fine reporting there!

Source news.com.au

Well it isn't a lie, they are crew, and probably the photo was after the flight, just they weren't on that flight.

 

[Mwenenzi]

Avherald-->The Aviation Herald
The Aviation Herald List has others with "engine problem", "engine shutdown in flight" and other technical failures.
In ~6 months time reading the official report will a little interesting, but will not make the tabloid headlines.

 

[NM]

Well, here it is ... and not from the usual news media, but from a respected Aviation news provider - Australian Aviation:


Something about this QF144 flight just does not seem quite right ???

BREAKING: Qantas flight issues midair mayday call

Current reports cite the cause of Qantas Flight QF144 making the call as an engine malfunction.

australianaviation.com.au

 

[Mwenenzi]

View attachment 314691
Something about this QF144 flight just does not seem quite right ???

Hmmm. What could that be?? But spare engines are always welcome.

 

[TheInsider]

Well, here it is ... and not from the usual news media, but from a respected Aviation news provider - Australian Aviation:

View attachment 314691
Something about this QF144 flight just does not seem quite right ???

BREAKING: Qantas flight issues midair mayday call

Current reports cite the cause of Qantas Flight QF144 making the call as an engine malfunction.

australianaviation.com.au

"respected"???

 

[SeatBackForward]

Well, here it is ... and not from the usual news media, but from a respected Aviation news provider - Australian Aviation:

View attachment 314691
Something about this QF144 flight just does not seem quite right ???

BREAKING: Qantas flight issues midair mayday call

Current reports cite the cause of Qantas Flight QF144 making the call as an engine malfunction.

australianaviation.com.au

I see it now, there are far too many business class rows!

 

[QF WP]

Well they do cite the photographer and note that it is an A380, but surely they have a stock photo of a 737-800 (or can lift one from the Qantas website). Lazy because they wanted to get it out quickly - probably?

 

[RichardMEL]

Thank you, as always, for detailed comments and of course knowledgeable comments @jb747

 

[Quickstatus]

probably

Or maybe, just maybe they don't know the difference?.

 

[NM]

"respected"???

They are generally on-the-ball when it comes to things like getting the correct aircraft type in the picture. They do specialise in aviation-related news/information, unlike the general mainstream media.

 

[jase05]

Media has already moved on.
QF101 SYD-NAN now has made the news

 

[RichardMEL]

Really unfortunate timing of a fault indicator and proper procedure happening for QF. yep the trolls have come out to play again already with peanut gallery comments (yep, me included). sigh.

a different 73H btw

 

[SeatBackForward]

Really unfortunate timing of a fault indicator and proper procedure happening for QF. yep the trolls have come out to play again already with peanut gallery comments (yep, me included). sigh.

a different 73H btw

yeah but "Everything was done exactly as it should be" isn't a headline.

 

[Quickstatus]

Question, is the operational spare policy still in operation?

 

[RichardMEL]

Question, is the operational spare policy still in operation?

No, I think Harry has been pretty much decommissioned....

oh wait...

(sorry!)

 

[jb747]

No, I think Harry has been pretty much decommissioned....

oh wait...

(sorry!)

Mined for his component parts, perhaps.

Same thing happened after QF30. For months afterwards, if a QF Captain farted it was in the news.

 

[Matt_01]

It was a passenger's fault Qantas CEO blames emergency landing on passenger who didn’t switch phone to flight mode